Aim 2: To create more equal access to specialist support and
national capacity - like murder investigation teams, firearms teams
or flood rescue - where and when they are needed

What has been achieved so far?

For both services, relatively detailed documentary evidence
is now available about the establishment and functioning of
arrangements, post-reform, for accessing specialist expertise and
national capacity. In relation to policing, this comes from three
main sources: the Post-Implementation Benefits Review; local
inspections carried out by
HMICS;
and the review of armed policing by the
SPA. In
relation to Fire and Rescue, key sources include
HMFSI's
report on Equal Access to National Capacity; the
SFRS
Review of Specialist Equipment; benefits realisation and service
transformation reports; and Audit Scotland's report on the
SFRS.
This evidence is generally of good quality and based on
systematic processes of data collection and analysis.

Across both services, the documentary evidence and interviews
with key stakeholders suggest that significant progress has been
made in creating more equal access to specialist support and
national capacity. Indeed, several interviewees suggested that,
of the three main aims, this was the one in which greatest
progress could be demonstrated. To a large extent, this reflects
the relatively cumbersome mutual aid mechanisms for accessing
such resources under legacy arrangements in both services and the
almost immediate scope to share resources more effectively once
sub-national boundaries were removed.

In policing, for example, it was reported that pre-reform the
limited nature of formal processes for requesting specialist
units from other forces and cross-charging meant the demand was
sometimes artificially suppressed. A number of interviewees
reflected that there is now a much clearer process with resources
available via both the Operational Support Division (
OSD which
includes air support, marine unit, dogs and horses, and Firearms)
and the Specialist Crime Division (
SCD). There
are Major Investigation Teams (
MITs) for
the North, East and West area which focus on homicide and other
serious crime.

In terms of outcomes, interviewees suggested that the Police
response to major incidents (such as murder investigations or
large-scale public order events) had improved as a result of the
new arrangements - not only in terms of the incident itself but
in managing the broader ongoing demands of local policing.

Within Fire and Rescue,
SFRS
and
HMFSI
have established a detailed picture of variation in equipment,
skills and capacity across Scotland and progress is reported in
addressing these regional variations by interviewees. For
example, some key resources, such as water rescue teams, have
been redeployed in line with geographic risk profiles.

Interviewees pointed to the Clutha Bar helicopter accident
and the widespread flooding in December 2015 as examples of
faster and more effective deployment of specialist expertise and
national capacity than would have been possible pre-reform. It
was identified that an important aspect of this has been the
standardisation of procedures and equipment (such as Personal
Protective Equipment) across the country as a whole, alongside
development of a national database that ensures that all Fire
control rooms have live information on the location and skillset
of flexi-duty managers to support local and national
mobilisation.

Ongoing challenges

In the context of policing, some interviewees saw the
creation of national, divisional and local specialist units as
having had some negative impact on the availability local
'frontline' resource, a point underlined by inspectorate reports.
There are also questions - raised by both interviewees and in
inspectorate reports - about the implications of a lack of
crossover between national units and local Police officers.
Specific issues raised here include the risk that intelligence
and performance monitoring opportunities are being missed through
failures to debrief specialist officers deployed locally, and the
potential for local officers to become deskilled through a
reliance on national expertise.

The very real financial constraints around all public
services also mean that there are limits to the extent to which
dedicated national teams will be able to handle demand across
Scotland as a whole. Some interviewees suggested that there is a
need for greater multi-skilling of local Police staff as a
result.

A further important challenge highlighted by some
interviewees in the context of policing is to ensure that
attempts to establish equal access to specialist resources are
not seen or experienced locally as 'imposing' approaches or
solutions that do not fit that specific context. The controversy
over the routine carrying of firearms is an example of this. The
SPA's
inquiry into this issue suggested that Police Scotland had
underestimated the community impact of armed officers being sent
on routine calls and suggested that better assessment and
explanation of such decisions is required.

In relation to Fire and Rescue, despite greater ease of
access to specialist expertise and national capacity within the
new single geography, there is ongoing work around the strategic
location of both specialist and non-specialist appliances and
resources, with pre-existing distribution reflecting past needs.
The task of ensuring that expertise, equipment and capacity is
distributed appropriately and equitably needs to take account of
various challenges, including the need to balance national and
local interests and the changing role of the service as a
whole.

It is also clear in relation to
SFRS
that equality of access does not always imply centralisation. In
relation to staff training, for example, there is a move to
provide local training facilities that reduce the travel time and
costs associated with receipt of training.

Evidence gaps

In relation to Police Scotland, there is strong process-based
and transactional evidence and evidence relating to the
functioning of the new arrangements. In
SFRS,
there is strong evidence of detailed consideration of variations
in baseline resources and risk profiles in preparation for a more
strategic approach to distributing specialist resources.

Across both Police and Fire and Rescue in relation to Aim 2,
evidence appears more limited in relation to outcomes. There is
anecdotal and case study evidence but this tends to be high level
and could be stronger in terms of analytical rigour. Closer
examination of the causal connections and inter-dependencies
would also be beneficial when considering activity underpinning
work relating to this strategic aim. Consideration of the
unintended consequences of the increased use of specialist units
would also be useful, particularly if this is seen as diluting
local expertise and reducing the pool of experienced personnel
working at a local level.

It appears that other 'voices' need to be heard both within
the services and within communities about the impacts and
implications of recent developments in relation to accessing
specialist expertise. This would help move from evidencing
'outputs' and 'process' to 'outcomes' and 'impact' across a wider
spectrum of stakeholders. In terms of the evaluation itself,
future work (through, for example, geographical case studies)
will balance the perspectives presented here with the views and
experiences of those in local areas.

Conclusions and key lessons

For both services, it is reported that the removal of the
legacy boundaries has made it much easier to deploy specialist
expertise and national capacity as and when required, and there
is anecdotal and some case study evidence that this has resulted
in positive outcomes.

Within policing, the key questions are now about the impacts
of the creation and deployment of specialist units on local
policing, and about how to balance consistency of service
delivery with local needs and expectations.

In relation to Fire and Rescue, the main challenges are now
around taking forward the most equitable and appropriate
geographical location of assets and expertise linked to the three
Service Delivery Areas covering the North, East and West of the
country, given the very different risk profile of different
areas, increasingly significant financial constraints (also faced
by Police Scotland) and the changing nature of the demands on
(and expectations of) the service as a whole.

As with
Aim
1 there is a clear role for the evaluation to address a
number of the evidence gaps at national and local levels around
(internal and external) perceptions of the outcomes associated
with changes to specialist services. Evidence gaps in relation to
the causal connections between service reconfiguration and
specific outcomes will also be addressed.

One of the key lessons in relation to Aim 2 is the need to
recognise and map the inter-dependencies between specialist
functions and more routine activities in order to identify any
potential areas of tension, particularly in terms of maintaining
skills in different parts of an organisation. The need for a
detailed understanding of risk and demand profiles is also
fundamental to decisions around the (re)distribution of
specialist expertise and physical assets with associated
consequences for the relocation of staff and training
requirements.